3 ms·
> Diehr, 450 U.S. at 188-178; establishes that if the patent is for a particular application of an abstract idea, but not for the abstract idea itself, it may b
by jlgreco 14y ago
> Diehr, 450 U.S. at 188-178; establishes that if the patent is for a particular application of an abstract idea, but not for the abstract idea itself, it may be patentable.
So what does that mean, "a^2 + b^2 = c^2" cannot be patented, but "using 'a^2 + b^2 = c^2' to find the length^2 of the hypotenuse of a right triangle" in theory could be (were it "invented" today of course)?
- greyfade 14y agoIf it were being used to create a measuring implement, perhaps. But yes, you've got the gist of it.
- greyfade 14y agoActually, I should clarify a little: The more recent In re Bilski establishes that a rote process (like finding the length of the hypotenuse in your example) is not patentable. It requires a machine or a tangible transformation. That is, a machine that does this calculation.